The principal investigator has recently demonstrated that counterattitudinal behavior leads to internalization and attitude change when (1) the subject feels personally responsible for the consequences of his act (e.g. he is given high choice or a small financial inducement) or (2) counterattitudinal behavior has significant consequences. The proposal on which this grant is based reviews the extensive laboratory research on forced compliance and demonstrates that this personal-responsibility-for-consequences theory removes the apparent confusion and contradiction from that literature. The specific aims part includes a further analysis of the personal-responsibility-for-consequences theory with the intent to increase the generalizability or external validity of laboratory forced compliance research. The experiments proposed are intended to increase our confidence in generalizing from the laboratory forced compliance setting to socialization, deviancy, and psychotherapy situations. According to the present theory, successful behavior change in these settings depends on whether or not the compliance inducer successfully (1) introduces the novel, atypical behaviors which are consistent with the desired change, (2) which have significant consequences, and (3) the actor feels that he, himself, is personally responsible for these consequences. The personal-responsibility-for-consequences theory and paradigm will thus be extended into non-laboratory settings, especially the psychotherapeutic setting.